1

The

emergence

ofsecular

insight

practice

in

Australia

DavidBubna—Litic and Winton

Higgins

In

Australia overthelastthree

decades.

secular

insight

(vupassana)

meditation

practice

has

increasingly

drawn

away

fromit 'Ihentvadin

origins,

thus

cxemplie

fying

a

widertrendinwestemBuddhistcirLi soverthesecondhalfof

thelast

century

to loosen

tieswith theirAsiantraditionsof

origin.

in 1998 Batehelor

articulated the

divergencebydrawing

acontrastbetween

’religions

Buddhism‘

and ‘dhanna

practice‘

in

his Buddhism wilhoui

Beliefs

(Batehclor l998a).

a

contrastwithresonancesin

the

changes

now

unfolding

inAustralia.He

elaborated

his

keyconcepts,

notleast

the

"deepagnostieism'

hediscernedintheBuddha's

own

teaching.

inother

writingspublished

inthesame

year(Batchelor

1998b:

[9980‘

Thecontrast

acknowledges

a

strongtendency

towardssecularizationmthe

rc-rcndering

ot'Buddhismin

culturallyappropriate

termsforwesterners

who.from

the

l970s.

began

to

practise

meditation

seriously

in thistraditionin

significant

numbers.

As

Gombrichand

Obeyesekere

remind

us.however,

this

trendnowvisiblein

western

countriessuchasAustraliahasAsian

(not

leastSri

Lankan)

precedents

going

backtothelastthreedecadesofthenineteenth

century

(1998:

chapter

6).

'lhe

elementsot‘thatearlierAsianBuddhistconfrontation

with

modernity

included

a

fresh

re-rcading

ot~canonical

texts.

promotion

of

serious

Ia)

dharma

practice.

scepticism

towardsclaimsto

onhodoxy.

monastic

authority

andthe

efficacy

of

ritual.anddismissalofthefolkloricaccretionsto

popular

observance.Allresur-

faced

inthelatetwentieth

century

developments

in

westerncountries.

In

Australia, however,

their

expression

hasbeen

mediatedand

complicated.

both

throughbeing

meldedwithcentralwestemmoral

concepts

and

through

the

growth

ofseriousdhanna

practice

fromthe

[9705.

ata

timewhenthecenitudes

of

modernity

wereto someextent

giving

way

toan

embraceof

uncertainty,

ambivalenceand

fragmentation.

Thisembracehasotlen

attractedthecatchall

(but

contestedand

unstable)term.

‘postmodemity'.

Wethus

needtohold

lightlyany

classificatory

schema

—

beit‘traditional'versus‘modem‘

BuddhismorMartin

Baumann's

(200I)suggested

heuristic

perindization

ol~

Buddhismintocanonical.

traditional,

modernand

today‘s

‘global‘stages

(

1998:

chapter

6).'

Nevertheless.as

long

aswehonourits

heuristicintent.

appreciation

ofBuddhism'scurrent

global

character

helpfully

sensitizesustothe

dangers

of

accounting

forcurrentdevel»

opmenls

in

parochial(western

or

national)terms.

while

avoiding

the

ironically